TROUT FLY-FISHING IN AMERICA 



Consequently, it must follow, as a fact, that all anglers, 

 irrespective of method, are not equally good fly-fishermen. 



Because one dry-fly angler fishes across or down the 

 stream and one wet-fly angler fishes with his fly well down 

 in the water, it does not follow that such an application of 

 either method is the proper or controlling factor by which 

 either style of fly-fishing should be judged. 



Here then is established the fact that when comparing 

 the relative merits of wet and dry-fly fishing it is mani- 

 festly proper that we should consider the two methods as 

 set forth by the best exponents of each art, and it should 

 be done fairly and without favor. 



The dry-fly angler uses flies that are constructed so as 

 most nearly to represent the natural ones found upon the 

 streams, and also in such a manner as to make them float 

 upon the surface of the water. 



The wet-fly angler uses flies that only passably repre- 

 sent a few of the natural ones, but which in most instances 

 do not represent, in the remotest manner, any known kind 

 of fly. 



The dry-fly angler fishes his fly upon the surface of the 

 water exclusively, while the wet-fly angler fishes his fly 

 or flies both upon and below the surface of the water, de- 

 pending upon conditions. 



The object with each method being to deceive the trout 

 and make them rise to the fly. 



When the dry-fly is cast, to use the expression of a 

 "Disciple,'' everything is "within the range of vision, with 

 the fly always on the surface," and this is equally true 



6i 



